RELIC OF THE BOYNE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1558, 30 September 1912, Page 5

RELIC OF THE BOYNE.

MESSAGES FROM UNIONIST . LEADERS. MR. BALFOUR'S APPEAL. (Rec. September 29, 5.5 p.m.) London, September 28. A meeting in Ulster Hall presented Sir Edward Carson with the original' flag carried before King William at the Battle of the Boyne. There was an extraordinary demonstration, and letters were read from Mr. Bonar Law (Leader of the Opposition), and Lord Lansdowne (Opposition Leader in the House of Lords), and Mr. Austen Chamberlain, and others. , Sir Edward Carson said he accepted the flag' as a token of victory for civil and religious liberty, and returned it to Colonel Wallace to keep as a sacred trust until the conspiracy .was killed. Mr. Bonar Law wrote that he was convinced that self-restraint in Uulster would be difficult, if the position were desperate, but it would not be so, as victory was certain. Ulster could rely on the Unionist party's support. Mr. Balfour, the ex-Lender of the Opposition, wrote: "Let me not be told that a British Government has been found sufficiently wicked and a House of Commons sufficiently subservient to say to Ulster: 'Leave us or we shoot you down.'" An overflow meeting, attended by i twenty-five thousand persons, was similarly enthusiastic. SUPPORT FROM THE EMPIRE. MANIFESTO BY SIR E. CARSON. ; (Rec. September 29, 5.5 p.m.) London, September 27. ' On the ove of Ulster Day, Sir Edward Carson' issued a message, stating that there wns a great outburst of enthusiasm i in Ulster. The sympathy and offers of \ support held from every part of the : United Kingdom and the Empire had ' deeply affected his colleagues and him- ' self, and had given them renewed \ strength. It was realised that they were ] fighting for freedom and for the inspir- i ing ideals of unity and the Empire. 1 WILL NOT BE BLACKMAILED. i A MINISTER'S DECLARATION. ' (Rec. September 29, 5.5 p.m.) , London, September 29. Sir J. Simon, Solicitor-General, in a. speech at Leeds, said Liberals must not \ speak slightingly of the ignorance and , obstinacy which appeared to inspire the ] Ulster campaign, but the demonstrations must bo given due weight. The Government was prepared to apply every safeguard in the Home Rulo Bill 'which reason and caution might suggest, but would refuse to bo blackmailed. THE DEMANrTFoR HOME RULE. PREFACE BY MR. ASQUITH. London, September 27. Mr. Asquith, tho Prime Minister, in a e preface to a reprint of Cabinet Ministers' f Home Rule speeches, says:—"The demand i for Home Rule, comes unabated from n four-fifths of the Irish representatives, i while the people of England, Scotland, and AVales ore prepared to give unprejudiced consideration and effect to a settlement based on justice, common sense, and Imperial convenience." ( A PLEDGE FROM PEERS. ! \ l RESISTANCE TO THE BILL. !•! London, September 2S. * T,ord Robert*, Lovd DuflVriu, and lord £ .Kauiiulv are among the Irish. Pecr& sigii, (j

ing a pledgo that in tho event of (ho Homo Rulo Bill being pnsscd by the House of 'Commons without a prior reference to the country, they will oppose the establishment of either House of an Irish Legislature. "BE READY FOR DEEDS," -ADMIRAL DERESFORD'S ADVICE. London, September 27. Addressing fifteen thousand persons at Ballyroonpy, County Down, Admiral Lord Charles Beresford, M.V., counselled Ulstermen as follows:—"Without words, prepare for eventualities; be ready for deeds." "THE MEREST BOSH." MR, W. REDMOND ON WAR TALK. ; New York, September 28. " Mr. William Redmond, M.P., in an in- _ tcrvicw here, said it was absurd to think ; that the Ulster trouble would affect the ■ passage of the Home Rule Bill. The talk of civil war was the merest bosh. [ "HIGH-SOUNDING TALK." LIBERAL VIEW OF THE SITUATION. Few English Unionists, the London liconomist" declares, believe that Ulster really will revolt. Whatever nmv happen next month or next vear we in Eng- > mud (continues the "Economist") certainly do not, bolievo that there is going to be a civil war/and at present the discussion of a possible outbreak is carried on mainly by party men anxious to score a point through the folly of the other side, the plain Englishman knows perfectly well that, the situation does not justify rebellion. He may dislike the Government, hut he is not prepared to revolt against it, and if hot-headed Ulstermen are under the impression that the sympathy of respectable England is on their side, they would do well to rid themselves at once of this very false idea. Wild political language is familiar and casv, out wild political action, even in these disturbed days, does not recommend itm« to those-sober business men of whom the Unionist party is mainly composed. But, adds our contemporary, while wo discount the high-sounding talk of a certain typo of English politician and a certain section of the Engl sh pr.ss, w« cannot escape from this one outstanding ami extraordinary fact-that the leader ot the Conservative partv has definite! v and repeatedly encouraged the outbreak ot civil war. The constitutional arguments of mandates and elections which he puts forward to justify his action need not detain us. Every party in Opposition thinks the Government unfair in its procedure and without a mandate for its policy; and if Mr. Law is justified in setting up a rebellion, then any Opposition leader of the last fifty years might tairty havo raised his standard and summoned his followers to arms against the Government. Nobody is deceived by the argument, which is obviously an afterthought brought forward to make good the original mistake. ' But why was the original blunder made? Whv has Mr. Law committed himself and his'party to open rebellion and civil war? The answer, lye think, is this—that Mr. Bonar Law is more orator than stateman, and that his speeches control his policy instead of his policy controlling his speeches. Ho has for years enjoyed a reputation as a hard hitter and a fighting speaker, ar.i his efforts in debate have alwavs been approved by tho extreme section of his party. But unfortunately Mr. Law, in speech and in debate, is always out for cheers. Unless he is supported by constant applause his eloquence will not flow; he speaks without the restraint of written notes, and he is constantly tempted by the prospect of "loud Opposition cheers" to go beyond his purpose, and play to the most violent, because they are the most noisy, members of his party. Anxious to make the rousing speeches that arc expected of him, he has committed liimself and his followers to the most embarrassing policy h cpnceivable, and stands as a living witnossito. the dangers of a glib and ready tongue. His party would have been more safely guided by the shrewd judgment of Mr.'Long or the patient common-sense of Mr. Austen Chamberlain. ULSTER NOT TO BLAME. SIB E. CARSON'S DEFENCE. The Unionist attitude in Ulster wns interestingly set out in a. letter which Sir Edward Carson wrote to a correspondent last month:— "After the surrender of the Liberals in 1886 to the forces of lawlessness and disorder in Ireland," stated Sir Edward Carson, "the horrible and detestable crimes of murder, boycotting, intimidation, firing into dwelling-houses, maiming cattle, and resistanco to the forces of the Crown were not only daily condoned by the Literal Party, but I was myself present on many occasions when Liberal members of Parliament thronged the Courthouses in Ireland, with a view to encouraging those who wero being prosecuted and intimidating tho magistrates! 'In the House of Commons the magistrates and the whole administration of the law were held up to odium and ridicule even by Mr. Gladstone and Lord Morley (then Mr. John Mnriey), who came to Ireland to give evidence against the police in the matter of a i int which was got up for his special edification. "This Long, Dark History," "And during all this long, dark history, which it is now convenient for Liberals to ignore, where is the enunciation by the Liberal party of their high principles of subserviency to government which are necessary to prevent anarchy and to preserve the foundation of social order? Unfortunately, the Liberal Party were then drawing 'a-blank cheque of indefinite currency' against the whole resources of the Liberal Parly, which 'ruffians' in Ireland liave continued to present every morning for payment 'filled in by the hand of crime.' "If Ulstermen imitated these methods, which God forbid, would _ they have the sympathy, if not the assistance, of Mr. Churchill and his friends, or would tho fact that 80 Irish votes formed a consideration for tho cheque make a diffcrUlster Will Fight. "And yet these Ulstermen have no selfish personal aggrandisement as the goal to which they struggle. Tliey are fighting, and will continue to fight to remain in the community and under tho constitution in which they were lxirn— to maintain the same privileges, that every Englishman and Scotsman possesses—to escape from nliamlonnient to those whoso history they understand, and whose methods thev abhor. "Mr. Churchill fails to point to any precedent in any civilised country for the betrayal of suoh a people, and when to ] this is added the fact that, they are being asked to acquiesce in a constitution which has never been submitted to the people, I think the impartial student of history will say that, however, terrible and disastrous may bo tho consequences, not merely in Ireland, but to the general respect for law and order in the whole Kingdom, the fault lies onlv with those who for the most ignoble purposes haye initiated and persisted in such a policy."